Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

[Hammerhunker]

Re: New Back Breaker Trailer

To each their own, but I don't see how this game is going to make it. There is nothing from that trailer that would convince me to drop 60 bucks.

And why Backbreaker for a name? Stupid. But that's just me.

[hatisback]

Re: New Back Breaker Trailer

To each their own, but I don't see how this game is going to make it. There is nothing from that trailer that would convince me to drop 60 bucks.

And why Backbreaker for a name? Stupid. But that's just me.

And why does Madden say its simulation football? Stupid if you ask me.

[Senor_Herbatron]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

Game definitely looks solid. I hope you have the ability to edit teams, logos, etc....

I'll definitely be checking this game out.

[KG]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

Player models are beyond horrible but the locomotion looks pretty good.

[creed200569]

Re: New Back Breaker Trailer

And why does Madden say its simulation football? Stupid if you ask me.

exactly,Madden is nothing close to simulation football. All Pro 2k8 did a much better job simulating football than EA ever did or could. I dont care about the license,all that matters to me is playing real football and backbreaker is by far more impressive than Madden.

[Cryolemon]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

Game definitely looks solid. I hope you have the ability to edit teams, logos, etc....

I'll definitely be checking this game out.

I'm guessing you have the ability to edit all that stuff. It's been confirmed you can edit logos.

[TreyIM2]

I'll re-state what I've said about the reasoning behind this game - Proof of concept for EA. I still believe this game was only created at the request of EA when EA turned down Natural Motion, initially. The condition was that if Nat. Mot. could create a viable football game with the Euphoria engine they would bring it in for a future Madden. There was no way EA would bring this engine in without it being proven it could work in a football game, first, because they were not going to spend money and resources on bringing it in and trying to get it to work in-house. This is a one and done game, based on what I've felt from the beginning. HOPEFULLY, it will pan out and we could see this engine in Madden down the road but the way it looks as is, so far from all the vids I've seen, it's not looking so spectacular but it's only vids and they really haven't showed true gameplay, yet. We'll see.

[Hova57]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

Let's say for S and G that EA buys it. How long would it take it took about two years to get to the point that we are seeing. now. is it worth it

[allBthere]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

I'll re-state what I've said about the reasoning behind this game - Proof of concept for EA. I still believe this game was only created at the request of EA when EA turned down Natural Motion, initially. The condition was that if Nat. Mot. could create a viable football game with the Euphoria engine they would bring it in for a future Madden. There was no way EA would bring this engine in without it being proven it could work in a football game, first, because they were not going to spend money and resources on bringing it in and trying to get it to work in-house. This is a one and done game, based on what I've felt from the beginning. HOPEFULLY, it will pan out and we could see this engine in Madden down the road but the way it looks as is, so far from all the vids I've seen, it's not looking so spectacular but it's only vids and they really haven't showed true gameplay, yet. We'll see.

you're talking out of your behind man. EA 'requested' natural motion to make a game? EA never saw the value in the technology where a less lazy company like rockstar did immediately. Natural Motion got 505 games as publisher - if it was really a pet project of EA - they would have published it or payed for it.
505 wouldn't really be down with your scenario either.

IMO the cost of making BB, selling it and distributing it > license to use euphoria.

While it's true that almost all developers or industry people will check out backbreaker, and they could push more license packages, it's just arrogant to ASSUME they made the game because EA requested it - especially since the game (player models etc.) look just like those early blue guys from the NM demonstration. HAd nothing to do with EA. They also showed a karate guy in that vid too, and later Indiana Jones was in development by a different company. They believe in their product and more than anything, are proving that a smaller development team can make good games using the technology (which makes development easier).

I hope we see combat games soon using euphoria as well.

[stiffarmleft]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

I'm just happy to see players plant their feet when they make hard cuts. I also liked how close the ball got to the defenders hand, without be intercepted, being able to fit the ball into tight spaces and lofting it over linebackers should really elevate the passing game. If the player ratings matter and the AI doesn't have any glaring weaknesses, this game should be a winner. The players do look a little stiff when running, but I've definitely seen more that I like than dislike in the trailers.

[SouthernBrick]

I like the new vid but, Its a hype vid, No doubt the the motion of the players out beat Madden anyday but, the jukes look stiff. I smaller players get lower than that when juking but, overall It looks like It'll be a fun game. Not all the hits were over the top missile style hits and It looks like they do have so different type pads and bodies for customization.

I trust that the gameplay will likely beat out madden's animations but, hope to see lower jukes in the future though. Also the sounds are pretty clean Imo because, pads are going to pop and guys are not going to be silent when they get hit regaurdless of how hard.

[TreyIM2]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

you're talking out of your behind man. EA 'requested' natural motion to make a game? EA never saw the value in the technology where a less lazy company like rockstar did immediately. Natural Motion got 505 games as publisher - if it was really a pet project of EA - they would have published it or payed for it.
505 wouldn't really be down with your scenario either.

IMO the cost of making BB, selling it and distributing it > license to use euphoria.

While it's true that almost all developers or industry people will check out backbreaker, and they could push more license packages, it's just arrogant to ASSUME they made the game because EA requested it - especially since the game (player models etc.) look just like those early blue guys from the NM demonstration. HAd nothing to do with EA. They also showed a karate guy in that vid too, and later Indiana Jones was in development by a different company. They believe in their product and more than anything, are proving that a smaller development team can make good games using the technology (which makes development easier).

I hope we see combat games soon using euphoria as well.

Now who exactly sounds like the arrogant one, here? There were two key words I said at the beginning of my second sentence "I ...believe" meaning that it is an OPINION not fact yet you come at me talking stating "you're talking out of your behind man" and "it's just arrogant to ASSUME..." as if what YOU are stating IS fact, eh? Aren't YOU assuming as well? But I bet you're not calling yourself arrogant for what you ASSUME or even arrogant for attacking me as if what YOU are stating is the fact of all facts. At least I stated that what I was saying is something I believe which SHOULD be ASSUMED to be an opinion. Or is it a FACT that stating that what I believe is an opinion when using the very words "I believe"? Or am I NOT entitled to MY opinion just like YOU are entitled to YOUR opinion? Go riddle yourself with that one, child.

Yea, I love idiotic, hypocrites...

[Hammerhunker]

Re: New Back Breaker Trailer

And why does Madden say its simulation football? Stupid if you ask me.

We're not talking about Madden, stay on topic. We are giving our response to the Backbreaker trailer.

[hatisback]

Re: New Back Breaker Trailer

Are you a mod? If not, dont tell me what to do please. I was staying on topic by saying that just because the name is backbreaker does not make it stupid. In metaphorical terms of course.

[allBthere]

Re: Backbreaker Trailer: On the Field

Now who exactly sounds like the arrogant one, here? There were two key words I said at the beginning of my second sentence "I ...believe" meaning that it is an OPINION not fact yet you come at me talking stating "you're talking out of your behind man" and "it's just arrogant to ASSUME..." as if what YOU are stating IS fact, eh? Aren't YOU assuming as well? But I bet you're not calling yourself arrogant for what you ASSUME or even arrogant for attacking me as if what YOU are stating is the fact of all facts. At least I stated that what I was saying is something I believe which SHOULD be ASSUMED to be an opinion. Or is it a FACT that stating that what I believe is an opinion when using the very words "I believe"? Or am I NOT entitled to MY opinion just like YOU are entitled to YOUR opinion? Go riddle yourself with that one, child.

Yea, I love idiotic, hypocrites...

looks like i touched a nerve.
ok, have fun with your riddle.